3333-1-61.3 Review process of proposals.

(A) Administrative review of proposals

(1) The chancellor's staff will review the proposals to ensure each proposal complies administratively with the general guidelines, requirements, and program objectives before referral for review and evaluation.

(2) If a proposal does not comply administratively, the chancellor may ask the lead applicant of the proposal clarifying questions and request additional information. The lead applicant of the proposal has ten days from notice of the defect to cure the proposal.

(3) A proposal that fails to comply administratively shall not be referred for review and evaluation.

(4) Proposals that are referred for review and evaluation will be posted on a web page on the Ohio board of regents' web site.

(5) The lead applicant of a proposal not referred for review and evaluation shall receive written notice within thirty days of the posted results of the administrative review.

(B) Review panel

(1) The chancellor, in the chancellor's discretion, may convene a panel, comprised of experts, to review and evaluate proposals.

(2) The chancellor may seek nominations for service on the panel from representatives of the colleges and universities intending to submit proposals. The chancellor, in the chancellor's discretion, shall make appointments to the panel.

(3) The panel, if convened, shall review and evaluate proposals in the following manner:

(a) Address the responsiveness of the proposal to the requirements of the request for proposal;

(b) Determine which proposals best meet the evaluation criteria;

(c) Determine which proposals should be recommended to the chancellor for funding consideration.

(4) The panel will make recommendations directly to the chancellor. The chancellor shall take into account the evaluations and recommendations made by the panel and shall make the final funding decisions.

(C) Review of proposals in absence of panel

(1) If the chancellor does not convene a review panel to review and evaluate proposals, the chancellor, or the chancellor's designee(s), shall review and evaluate the proposals in the following manner:

(a) Address the responsiveness of the proposal to the requirements of the request for proposal;

(b) Determine which proposals best meet the evaluation criteria;

(c) Determine which proposals should be considered by the chancellor for funding consideration, or in the case of review and evaluation by the chancellor's designee(s), recommended to the chancellor for funding consideration.

(2) The chancellor shall exercise independent judgment in making final funding decisions.

(D) Evaluation criteria

(1) General evaluation criteria

(a) Required criteria Proposals must encompass both of the following criteria to be considered for evaluation:

(i) The proposed plan will result in significantly increased higher education participation and success of Ohio students in STEM fields, STEM education, or medical areas:

(ii) All funds being requested shall be used for scholarships, fellowships, grants, or other monetary or nonmonetary incentives to students, and not for administration.

(b) Additional evaluation criteria Proposals should encompass one or more of the following criteria to be considered for evaluation:

(i) The proposed plan incorporates student internships and/or cooperative education experiences.

(ii) The proposed plan develops mentoring experiences involving faculty, students, and industrial partners.

(iii) The plan will result in appropriate ethnic diversity among majors and graduates in STEM fields, STEM education, or medical areas with particular emphasis on first-generation, needs-based, and underrepresented groups of students.

(iv) The proposed plan specifically targets timely degree completion and the reduction of attrition rates among majors in STEM fields, STEM education or medical areas.

(v) The applicant will demonstrate specific successes by its STEM students and graduates in fields that match the high-technology economic strength of Ohio.

(vi) The proposed plan will increase the recruitment of Ohio residents back into the state in order to enter graduate study in a STEM field, STEM education, or medical discipline.

(2) Required proposal criteria

In accordance with section 3333.62 of the Revised Code, proposals will be evaluated based on one or more of the following criteria:

(a) The quality of the program that is the subject of the proposal and the extent to which additional resources will enhance its quality.

(b) The extent to which the proposal is integrated with the strengths of the regional economy.

(c) The extent to which the proposal is integrated with centers of research excellence within the private sector.

(d) The amount of other institutional, public, or private resources, whether monetary or nonmonetary, that the proposal pledges to leverage.

(e) The extent to which the proposal is collaborative with other public or nonpublic Ohio institutions of higher education.

(f) The extent to which the proposal is integrated with the university's or college's mission and does not displace existing resources already committed to the mission.

(g) The extent to which the proposal facilitates a more efficient utilization of existing faculty and programs.

(h) The extent to which the proposal meets a statewide educational need.

(i) The demonstrated productivity or future capacity of the students or scientists to be recruited.

(j) The extent to which the proposal will create additional capacity in educational or economic areas of need.

(k) The extent to which the proposal will encourage students who received degrees in STEM fields or medicine from two-year institutions to transfer to state universities or colleges to pursue baccalaureate degrees in STEM fields or medicine.

(l) The extent to which the proposal encourages students enrolled in state universities to transfer into STEM fields or medicine programs.

(m) The extent to which the proposal facilitates the completion of a baccalaureate degree in a cost-effective manner, for example, by facilitating students' completing two years at a two-year institution and two years at a state university or college.

(n) The extent to which the proposal allows attendance at a state university or college of students who otherwise could not afford to attend.

(o) The extent to which other institutional, public, or private resources pledged to the proposal will be deployed to assist in sustaining students' scholarships over their academic careers.

(p) The extent to which the proposal increases the likelihood that students will successfully complete their degree programs in STEM fields, or medicine or in STEM education.

(q) The extent to which the proposal ensures that a student who is awarded a scholarship is appropriately qualified and prepared to successfully complete a degree program in STEM fields, or medicine or in STEM education, or medical education.

(E) Public meeting

Prior to final funding decisions by the chancellor, each proposal submitted for consideration shall be summarized by the chancellor's staff at a public meeting. Each public university or college with a proposal pending for consideration shall have the opportunity to review the summary and answer questions or respond to concerns about the proposal raised by the chancellor's staff.

(F) Selection and grant agreement preparation

(1) Upon completion of the review and evaluation process, and, if applicable, after recommendations have been made, the chancellor shall determine which proposals receive awards, in whole or in part. Lead applicants will be notified in writing of the outcome of their applications within forty-five days after final funding decisions have been made by the chancellor.

(2) After a proposal has been selected for funding by the chancellor, the chancellor's staff will seek approval from the state controlling board to prepare the final grant agreement.

(3) At the request of the chancellor, a lead applicant institution or a collaborating institution of a proposal selected for funding and seeking approval from the state controlling board shall attend the controlling board meeting.

Effective: 11/12/2008
R.C. 119.032 review dates: 11/12/2013
Promulgated Under: 119.03
Statutory Authority: 3333.61
Rule Amplifies: 3333.61 , 3333.62 , 3333.63 , 3333.64 , 3333.66
Prior effective dates: 9/26/07 (Emer)